Green Tractor Talk banner

1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
142 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi,
Just purchased my 1025r in December and since I have not even owned a lawn mower for the last 21 years I am getting up to speed on this tractor stuff.
New to us house in NEPA with 2 1/4 acres, mostly woods but I did get the 54" MMM so we will see how mowing is in the spring.

I have the FEL with Artillian pallet fork frame and the front Quik-Tatch Hitch Adapter for the JD front plow. I got just the extension hoses and for the 3-4 plowings I have done this setup works great.

But my question concerns rear ballast. I have fluid filled rear tires and 50lb tire weights but all the reading I have done seems to say I still need more rear weight. So, a ballast box or suit case weights?
I would get the Heavy Hitch 3 point attachment, this gives me a 2" receiver also so I think this might be best? I do not have any 3 point attachments and I don't think I will be getting any right away.

Thanks for the help and I have been spending alot of time reading and learning from everyone here.

Kevin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
523 Posts
I ballast mine using 4 suitcase weights at the back of a TSC carry all. If I have the weights turned backwards and with a 15 gallon sprayer half full on the carry-all, it will raise the tires off the ground when I remove the FEL. I'm cutting my overall weight down by using the suit case weights 4' back from the 3 point. Keeps my total weight down for yard travel. Helps getting around on my hills also.

If you want total weight, the ballast box will give you the most opportunity and cheaper. You can rig it to carry stuff also. Lots of posts on this. The Heavy Hitch multi-tasks also with the hitch and being able to adjust the ballast easily, but the weights are pricey.

IMG_0231.jpg


IMG_0151.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,676 Posts
I vote for the Heavy Hitch (actually the 'super heavy hitch' which holds up to 16 weights).

I recommend getting the storage cart with it. I find that the ballast is compact, easy to store, and more 'flexible' than a ballast box.

For instance, If I want to run the tiller without the loader, I can put the weights on the front end of the tractor.

Overall, the Heavy Hitch is a 'top of the line' solution to the problem. Other options are less expensive. This option provides the best of everything.
The only thing lighter is you wallet! :laugh:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,130 Posts
I have a backhoe to ballast , but I also have a weight bracket and weights that I made myself , as for me , space is a premium . And BTW

:gtfam:
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigJim55 and TJR345

·
Bonehead Club Lackey
Joined
·
10,269 Posts
I vote for the Heavy Hitch (actually the 'super heavy hitch' which holds up to 16 weights).

I recommend getting the storage cart with it. I find that the ballast is compact, easy to store, and more 'flexible' than a ballast box.

For instance, If I want to run the tiller without the loader, I can put the weights on the front end of the tractor.

Overall, the Heavy Hitch is a 'top of the line' solution to the problem. Other options are less expensive. This option provides the best of everything.
The only thing lighter is you wallet! :laugh:
I use suitcase weights for front and rear ballast.
My way of doing it too. Don't have the Heavy Hitch yet but have my own way of putting the weights on the back. I don't like the size of the ballast box. Sticks out the back to far for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigJim55

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,915 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,044 Posts
I use an Omni hitch, which is similar to the Heavy Hitch with eight 42 pound suitcase weights.

Welcome from northeastern Pennsylvania also.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,838 Posts
I use an Omni hitch, which is similar to the Heavy Hitch with eight 42 pound suitcase weights.

Welcome from northeastern Pennsylvania also.
Yep welcome from NEPA, near Scranton. Don is about 30 miles north of me. I bought a home made used hitch that holds 16 weights. Only have 6 42 pounders. Looking used but nobody gives um up!

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
142 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Thanks everyone, I think the suit case weights are the most vestibule, front or rear but also the most expensive. Been checking CL for used but not much savings over new. My dealer quoted me $67 for the 42lb weights.

Yep, just like I been reading, the implements and extras cost more than the tractor!

Kevin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
I would actually consider a Heavy Hitch if I didn't need a lot of weight.
I mean add it up, 16 weights @ $60 is $960 plus the cost of the hitch.
If you can get by with less weight it would be ok, but a ballast box
at $300-$400 plus concrete or sand gives a lot of weight at a more
economical price.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,136 Posts
I have a JD ballast box and heavy duty heavy hitch that holds up to 16 40# weights.
Either works fine, although, as others have said, the suitcase weights with the heavy hitch is more versatile. I find I use the heavy hitch with suitcase weights more than the ballast box. Mostly because of the receiver and the fact that the weights don't hang as low as the ballast box. Also, it is easy to adjust the amount of ballast based on what you are doing with the heavy hitch.
I vote for the heavy hitch with suitcase weights...I $$$$$ isn't a huge issue.

A weakness of the ballast box is, when and if you pull you tractor onto a trailer with the ballast box attached, you must adjust the 3 point top link to tilt the ballast box up in the back so it doesn't drag when pulling on the trailer.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
196 Posts
I use both the Ballast Box and the Heavy Hitch with suit case weights. I like the Ballast Box for the Winter with sand as I live on a steep hill and I use the sand for traction for my truck. Just stop the tractor halfway and (Turn it off) and hand broadcast. Then the Heavy hitch is used with my FEL as I find it easier without the added length behind me.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,658 Posts
I find I use the heavy hitch with suitcase weights more than the ballast box. Mostly because of the receiver and the fact that the weights don't hang as low as the ballast box. Also, it is easy to adjust the amount of ballast based on what you are doing with the heavy hitch.
When adjusting the weights on the Heavy Hitch, how do you calculate how many pounds of ballast is required to safely lift a given payload on the loader?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheSilverFox

·
Bonehead Club Lackey
Joined
·
10,269 Posts
When adjusting the weights on the Heavy Hitch, how do you calculate how many pounds of ballast is required to safely lift a given payload on the loader?
If it lifts the back end up or it feels lite, add more. :dunno:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
Cheaper, can hold more weight, but sticks out = ballast box

More expensive, less weight, but sticks out much less and you have a slick receiver hitch with a hook = heavy hitch

I have both, I swap them them between the SCUT and the LCUT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
Thanks everyone, I think the suit case weights are the most vestibule, front or rear but also the most expensive. Been checking CL for used but not much savings over new. My dealer quoted me $67 for the 42lb weights.

Yep, just like I been reading, the implements and extras cost more than the tractor!

Kevin
902.jpg
Who said you need Jd weights. I bought my 2520 used with 50 hours and it happened to come with some weights. I picked up 2 other weights at an auction for around $25 for both. I have to use the Heavy Hitch because I have a tight area to fit into and a ballast box wouldn't come close to fitting.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,136 Posts
When adjusting the weights on the Heavy Hitch, how do you calculate how many pounds of ballast is required to safely lift a given payload on the loader?
I wasn't so much referring to changing ballast when using the FEL. When I use my FEL, I either use my ballast box which weighs 600 lbs., heavy hitch loaded with 16 - 40 lb. suitcase weights, or most often I attach the BH (I have my rear tires filled and no rear wheel weights). I don't like using the FEL with less than the JD recommended amount (rear tires filled and 601 lb. of rear ballast) of ballast on the tractor. Not saying you can't, I just don't, especially when I am doing bucket work. When doing bucket work with the FEL, IMHO, using less than the JD recommended amount of rear ballast is asking for trouble, either by getting the tractor light or overloading the front axle. :good2:
When I have the forks attached, I will then, sometimes, use less rear ballast depending on what I am planning on lifting.

I like to change/limit/adjust the amount of 3 point ballast when I have the 54" blade, 54" snow blower or 52" broom attached. When using these front attachments, the 600 lbs. of rear ballast will actually make the front end light, especially when the front attachment is in float position, so it is nice to lower the amount of 3 point ballast with these front attachments, hence the heavy hitch with suitcase weights. With these types of front attachments, the ideal rear weight is, rear tires filled and some rear wheel weights. Because these types of front attachments are raised and then also lowered, usually in the float position, rear weight is needed when the attachment is lifted, but when lowered, you really don't want 3 point ballast that cantilevers weight off the front axle because this will affect steering ability. This is why the best rear weight, with these types of front attachments, is weight that is attached only to the rear wheels or tires filled.

You have to always be aware that the axles on a tractor see the tractors weight, that is above the axles, and all of the weight of all attachments and load. The issue is, how is this TOTAL load being disbursed between the rear axle and the front axle. This is why, filling the rear tires and/or adding rear wheel weights is a way of adding weight to the rear of the tractor, but has no affect on the amount of weight the rear or front axles see. The issue is, filling tires and rear wheel weights do not cantilever any weight off the front axle which is what you need when using an FEL. This does not mean that filling rear tires and rear wheel weights are a bad idea, but you must consider, this type of weight has absolutely no affect on the weight that the front axle sees.

Theoretically, if you were to fill the rear tires and add several sets of rear wheel weights, you could add enough rear weight to a tractor to be able to lift anything you wanted with the FEL, but you would not be cantilevering and of the FEL weight and load off the front axle, so you would potentially have a front axle or front tire failure within a short amount of time.

When using the FEL, the least amount of 3 point ballast that JD recommends is 506 lbs., and then they require 3 sets of wheel weights on each side. This would be 300 total lbs. of weight on the rear wheels and an additional 3 point ballast of 506 lbs. The 506 lbs. of 3 point ballast affects the amount of weight on the front axle, the 300 lbs. hanging on the rear wheels has no affect on removing weight off the front axle but does affect the stability of the tractor.

This is why "seat of the pants" ballasting is not always the best approach. Seat of the pants ballasting is only testing for stability of the tractor, not front axle loading. :good2:
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top